Mafiascum.net

In post 598, Frogsterking wrote:

In post 596, Mapuche Never Die wrote:

In post 594, Frogsterking wrote:Mapuche do you scum read anyone on my list

Not yet.

Who exactly do you scum read?

BBT, Intuile and Gandhi a little. But I’m also not caught up.

BBT’s interaction with furtive is also textbook pocketing.

Mapuche..you aren't trying to pocket me..are you?

PEDIT:

Well maybe we can agree on Gandhi then.

In post 137, Frogsterking wrote:I'm already leaning Town on hutmeil and BBT.

….hutmeil?
The guy who made 3 posts, one naked RVS vote, and 2 posts explaining that their vote was RVS….?

In post 603, Mapuche Never Die wrote:

In post 137, Frogsterking wrote:I'm already leaning Town on hutmeil and BBT.

….hutmeil?
The guy who made 3 posts, one naked RVS vote, and 2 posts explaining that their vote was RVS….?

Don't worry once you finally get to the present you will see me read flip on them

... actually, maybe start worrying.

In post 147, furtiveglance wrote:

In post 131, BlueBloodedToffee wrote:Alright, caught up. Stuff following;

In post 58, Frogsterking wrote: I actually think you've got me here and that everything you're saying in 53 is true.

I have three reasons mainly for not outing the scum slot yet:

• I want them to post more before they become alarmed so that it will be easier to look for their partners on later days.
  
  I want them to participate in my survey start and if I out my scum read on them first they probably won't want to do that.
  
  I want to give other players a chance to find them without me spoiling it.

I can tell you that I'm pretty sure I'm using spatial working memory to identify where to look rather than verbal working memory.

A few things here, first regarding 51;

1) Why would you trust a town reads reads so early into a game?
2) This feels like an attempt to pocket Ausuka

As for 58, this is a bad post in general. The first point about not wanting scum to know you're scum reading them - at this point about 5 players had posted anything of note, you were one of them and you town locked the other two (possibly three?) so there really weren't many players left who it could have been.

Other two points are fluff, especially third. Unless you're looking for potential mindmelds, but meh, not a fan of this at all.

In post 62, hutmeil wrote:VOTE: Furtive

Serious vote?

In post 76, DeltaWave wrote: frankly most of it confuses me and it seems like lots of weird rationalizations. unless this user is normally on edge all the time, it looks bad

Just walk me through your thought process here? Most of the posts confuse you (why is that scummy?) but you understand enough to say that their rationalising is weird? You either understand or you don't, it can't be both. Can you show some of their weird rationalising and explain why it's weird?

In post 100, Eiralox wrote:Bonsoir i be Eiralox and im here for the synth apocalypse.

Frogster and Mohab are lock town, we won't be voting there.

VOTE: Nuclear Ghandi

this is scum. guillotine asap.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YaGAk07qgf8

Well, you're seeing the game at the opposite end of the spectrum to me so we probably need to talk. All three of these are bad.

In post 101, Frogsterking wrote:

In post 100, Eiralox wrote:Mohab are lock town,

Explain please.

Happy to take the lock town read on yourself? Do you think you have been that townie?

In post 105, Greeting wrote:Hi.

VOTE: Nuclear Gandhi

Serious vote?

In post 113, furtiveglance wrote:Here are some reads of mine.

Consensus (or close to consensus) reads I have:

Frogsterking, Ausuka, Inutile, Hoppip Town

Reads that aren't consensus (I think):

Nuclear Ghandhi Town, Mohab sus, DeltaWave sus

In post 67, DeltaWave wrote:

In post 40, inutile wrote: i would rather this not continue to detract from us finding mafias

This has big "how do you do fellow kids" energy

VOTE: Inutile

I sus DeltaWave for this, and I think their delayed omgus style interaction with hoppip (83) also is mafia.

VOTE: DeltaWave

We're viewing the game almost identically, I like this. Just Frog being the outlier.

In post 121, Ausuka wrote:I'd also like Greeting to elaborate on their reads I guess

VOTE: furtiveglance

I like this best for now

Hi Ausuka, I think you're town and this is a bad vote. Change it please?

In post 123, DeltaWave wrote:

In post 113, furtiveglance wrote:
I sus DeltaWave for this, and I think their delayed omgus style interaction with hoppip (83) also is mafia.

VOTE: DeltaWave

this is the kind of nonsensical thing that makes you read as town tbh

This makes no sense at all and further intensifies my scum read on you.

In post 130, Frogsterking wrote: Once I saw Eir and Greeting both voted Ghandi I interpreted that as a sign that something was wrong. I reflected on why they may have done that. I realized that Ghandi is attempting to aggressively manipulate as many players as possible and that my initial Townread on them was naive. I believe Ghandi is either a manipulative Townie or a scum slot. In other words, I don't trust Ghandi regardless of their alignment, and I believe their alignment in this case may be scum, because even though it may be NAI for them to be manipulative, the way they're being manipulative in this game doesn't help them to collect AI information about other players.

Why do Eir and Greeting influence your read here? They've barely done anything.

Can you show examples of Ghandi being manipulative please?

I am happy that BBT is now voting with me, but I don't townread this post at all. I've found that responding to other people's reads/comments and following up like this is one of the easiest things to do as mafia, because a lot of the time town players' reads/comments on the game don't make a lot of sense and you can look towny as scum by criticising that.

Literally the only thing I do as town or scum is respond to other player’s posts

In post 155, Greeting wrote:

In post 122, furtiveglance wrote:

In post 82, hoppip wrote:

In post 76, DeltaWave wrote:

In post 73, hoppip wrote:

In post 67, DeltaWave wrote:

In post 40, inutile wrote: i would rather this not continue to detract from us finding mafias

This has big "how do you do fellow kids" energy

VOTE: Inutile

What do you think of the rest of its posts?

frankly most of it confuses me and it seems like lots of weird rationalizations. unless this user is normally on edge all the time, it looks bad

Hmm...I suppose that's fair. But I'm not so sure that "looks bad" is the same as "looks scummy." For instance, I think it looks bad that you're shading Inutile for superficial reasons. But do you think that's scummy?

Town

If this was a Newbie game, I would be more likely to agree. But I find clueless behavior like this in Normal games more suspicious. I guess this is a risk actual newbies take if they don't play a newbie game before jumping to the Normal queue.

a solid 95% of new accounts in the normal queue are alts as opposed to newbies

In post 153, Greeting wrote:

In post 131, BlueBloodedToffee wrote: Serious vote?

It wasn't when I cast it, but now that I have caught up, I don't really feel inclined to change it. I think pressure on that slot is justified.

This seems odd, given that Greeting hasn’t talked much about Gandhi.

In post 588, Frogsterking wrote:

In post 568, hutmeil wrote:^This. After you've put pressure on me, Frog followed suit with unconvincing reasons just to put a vote on me. Trying to test the water perhaps if anyone else will follow suit?

Yeah I have like 6 scum reads and my reasons for voting you look like confbias, so I'm guessing you were one of the slots I was wrong about.

Hmmm okay. Admitting you are wrong seems townie to me.

In post 159, furtiveglance wrote:

In post 92, Mohab500 wrote:

Vote: Inutile

I am just on the wagon, trying to lynch some rando early on good strat

How is this town? Eliminating some rando.....that's a low chance of success. Plus the use of 'just' - it's a minimiser. Mohab doesn't want to be looked at too closely for bandwagoning, and justifies it pre-emptively.

In post 158, Eiralox wrote:

In post 131, BlueBloodedToffee wrote:

In post 100, Eiralox wrote:Bonsoir i be Eiralox and im here for the synth apocalypse.

Frogster and Mohab are lock town, we won't be voting there.

VOTE: Nuclear Ghandi

this is scum. guillotine asap.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YaGAk07qgf8

Well, you're seeing the game at the opposite end of the spectrum to me so we probably need to talk. All three of these are bad.

Nah i'm right. that's it for talk.

Eira is probably town for this - their reasons may be wrong or right but I don’t think scum goes really hard at Gandhi and doesn’t say why.

In post 163, Ausuka wrote:

In post 143, furtiveglance wrote:

In post 120, Ausuka wrote:

In post 113, furtiveglance wrote:Here are some reads of mine.

Consensus (or close to consensus) reads I have:

Frogsterking, Ausuka, Inutile, Hoppip Town

Reads that aren't consensus (I think):

Nuclear Ghandhi Town, Mohab sus, DeltaWave sus

In post 67, DeltaWave wrote:

In post 40, inutile wrote: i would rather this not continue to detract from us finding mafias

This has big "how do you do fellow kids" energy

VOTE: Inutile

I sus DeltaWave for this, and I think their delayed omgus style interaction with hoppip (83) also is mafia.

VOTE: DeltaWave

I'd like if you could elaborate on your townreads.

Can you elaborate on your thoughts on 83 as well? I really do not see what you're seeing there

I missed this intially because I posted right after. I townread you for the progression on inutile, it looked natural. Frogsterking is making a lot of reads early on which I usually find towny. Inutile and Hoppip both just seem to have an innocent kind of energy, I can see their approaches to the game being from a town perspective.

83 interested me because DeltaWave says Hoppip is acting sus after their interaction in 82, in which Hoppip said DeltaWave 'shaded Inutile for superficial reasons', which is what it looked like to me as well. Hence I called it a delayed omgus.

Ok, the townreads don't do a lot for me but to be fair it is very early in the game, so

I don't think hoppip was really calling Delta suspicious in post 82. He seemed to be saying that Delta's point is bad but he's not necessarily scum for it. In any case, I'm still not really sure what you mean and why you find it suspicious - it's only one post after so not really delayed, and anyway don't you think town could suspect someone who they're in some sort of confrontation with? The idea of 'delayed omgus' just feels off to me honestly.

Ausuka makes a very good point about furtive here - looking back I strongly agree that the delayed omgus post doesn’t come from a natural thought process

In post 168, Greeting wrote:

In post 167, Ausuka wrote:

In post 165, Greeting wrote:

Ausuka

, any thoughts about my townreads?

I think the inutile read is pretty convincing but I'm townreading it anyway.

One thing I'm wondering about is that you implied you townread me pretty heavily earlier but now are saying you don't think I've been scumhunting much - did your read change or something?

Wait, what?

I am

townreading

intuile

. What do you mean by that sentence?

As for the read on you, while reading the thread, the tone and responses looked towny, but when I checked your ISO, the overall game contribution looked worse than

intuile

’s.

Greeting’s scumhunting seems very selective, he’s actively talking to very few players and ignoring a lot of other stuff happening in-thread.

In post 174, furtiveglance wrote:

In post 170, Eiralox wrote:

In post 161, furtiveglance wrote:

In post 160, Eiralox wrote:I have my reasons. No one's going to vote Mohab. Ghandi is still blatant scum. looking for the partners.

Do you want to share those reasons? Or at least invent some?

Im not sharing. And i'm starting to think you and ghandi are together. I don't like toffee's entrance or wrong read on frogster but I can still sort of see town there. But you? Toffee's defense of Ghandi is blatant, yours isn't and that wearies me.

Another thing - I don't get the refusal to share. This game is about co-operation. If you repeatedly refuse to talk you're transgressing, which may get you a sanction. And 3 sanctions is a full desadulation. And I might vote you for the simple crime of not talking.

A refusal to share reads usually isn’t beneficial, but I have almost always only seen town do it.

In post 608, hutmeil wrote:

In post 588, Frogsterking wrote:

In post 568, hutmeil wrote:^This. After you've put pressure on me, Frog followed suit with unconvincing reasons just to put a vote on me. Trying to test the water perhaps if anyone else will follow suit?

Yeah I have like 6 scum reads and my reasons for voting you look like confbias, so I'm guessing you were one of the slots I was wrong about.

Hmmm okay. Admitting you are wrong seems townie to me.

If Frog is opportunistic scum, wouldn't it make sense for him to pivot out of your wagon once it became clear it didn't have much traction?

In post 179, Ausuka wrote:

In post 171, furtiveglance wrote:Ok, you're right that delayed omgus isn't the right term. It's a knee-jerk reaction nonetheless, it felt to me that DeltaWave didn't want to allow Hoppip to put a bit of sus on them without getting the last word. As to whether or not Hoppip did put sus on DeltaWave, I would argue the answer is yes, whether intentional or otherwise. They said that DeltaWave 'looked bad' to them. So I read into that a bit, I thought DeltaWave looked worse from the whole interaction. I understand your issue with buzzwords like 'omgus', I have the same thing. But in this case I thought it was notable that DeltaWave didn't let it slide, they said they would respond later but made the point of saying that hoppip was being 'somewhat sus'

Do you disagree that town often suspect people who suspect them? I feel like you're pushing a scum!Delta possibility without really considering the other side of things. Like, there is indeed a world where Delta decided to scumread hoppip because he misinterpreted their post as a scumread and wanted to push back against it, but I don't see why you think it's likely, which I was hoping to get you to explain because I think it's a stretchy read.

The way Ausuka mediates the argument is very towny.

In post 186, furtiveglance wrote:

In post 184, Ausuka wrote:I'm aware, and I'm not as confident about this as I would be if you had made such a read later in the game. But I'm just saying it doesn't seem like your read on Delta came from a genuine thought process; if I'm mafia here and Delta is town I would probably want to vote Delta here, he feels like an easier push than other people who have been present so far. So when I feel like you decided he's scum and then made up the reasons it's concerning to me.

I didn't do that, it was an authentic read I made. The term I used wasn't accurate, and I get the sense that the term I used is partly why you don't trust my read. As for your point about easy pushes, that's just speculation. At the time of its conception my scumread of DeltaWave was completely original, with BBT agreeing later. Besides, that argument assumes tTown!Delta in its very logic.

tbh I really like the way furtive defends himself here, by saying that his read was authentic - like I don’t think scum does that in this scenario

I think I phrased that badly

Furtive has no real defense for himself other than just saying that his read was authentic, so I would think scum in this scenario wouldn’t admit that, and scum would try to shade Ausuka or do other things.

In post 613, Ausuka wrote:If Frog is opportunistic scum, wouldn't it make sense for him to pivot out of your wagon once it became clear it didn't have much traction?

Yes that makes sense too. I'm keeping both Frog!Town and Frog!Scum points in mind.

In post 218, Eiralox wrote:No other thoughts on anyone else Juice?

I don’t like this post. Instead of asking Juice whether they have any reads, Eiralox asks Juice whether they have no thoughts on anyone else. This has something of a negative undertone which shades Juice.

I still want to know why Frog unvoted Gandi to join a smaller Juice wagon while still scum reading Gandhi.

341, 342

In post 617, hutmeil wrote:

In post 613, Ausuka wrote:If Frog is opportunistic scum, wouldn't it make sense for him to pivot out of your wagon once it became clear it didn't have much traction?

Yes that makes sense too. I'm keeping both Frog!Town and Frog!Scum points in mind.

I guess I was wanting to know why you think it's townie of frog with that in mind

- 152 Greeting said what I thought about Inutile, in a sense. But what has my eyebrows rising is this being the first game solvy post by Greeting that I noted, and it's like overly giving town cred for seemingly more NAI things. This looks a little like unnecssary whiteknighting to me.
- 153 "I think pressure on that slot ." feels like a wolfy mindset by Greeting, thinking wether their actions can be justified.
- 155 I'm probably a bit paranoid about Greeting and looking too much into things, but I'm having trouble understanding what Greeting means here. They respond to a post that's saying just by saying . Furtiveglance is clueless for calling hoppip town? Or hoppip's is the clueless one? Greeting seems to have this playstyle of giving their own thoughts to other peoples thoughts, so the latter is the more likely one. But I don't see how that makes any other sense than it saying hoppip being clueless about either deltawave or inutile actions being wolfy.
- 160 Eirolox announces they're when in 158 they avoided the first chance to talk. Looking forward to their .
- Ausuka's posts continuesly just make sense to me honestly, make of that what you will.
- 165 had me check Greeting's ISO to see their posts up until this point. Looks like 145 was in the same spirit as 152. I genuinly can't tell what to make of Greeting's posts. All 3 of their notable game solvy posts so far looked like they could come from both alignments. I will decide wether to call them wolfy or towny if I see a continuation from them, since they seem to be the sort of player to give their thoughts to other people's thoughts and that's why they asked this question in 165; to have something to respond to.
- 168 Is an insightful post I feel, due to the misunderstanding in it. After them giving exhaustive reasons to townread inutile back in 152 , they asked another person their opinions on it. Their playstyle so far has been giving their thoughts to other people's thoughts, so it stands to reason that the Town!Greeting purpose for asking that question would had been to convince people to townread inutile. Yet after Ausuka said , then Greeting had this misunderstanding: . Meaning that their actual reason was to seek justification to townread inutile. Yes, this might be a towny who seeks approval of others for their reads due to low trust in their own reads. But I'm fairly certain it's >rand wolf.
- Just appriciate that not-ongoing by Eiralox in 170 which they previously said they'd do. Bad boy Eiralox, bad boy! But seriously, what are we supposed to make of this slot? They said they'd , but at every step of the way they avoid talking about my slot in any way.
- I think furtive's reasons in 171 to wolf read Delta are fine. I don't agree with them, but they're fine. I mean, I wouldn't call "wanting to have the last word when someone shades you" wolfy myself but I think it's fine for a slot for whom I said earlier that surface level reads are a good look on them.
- I might be biased, but 174 makes me never want to vote furtive before Eiralox.


Yes, I'm that lazy. Deal with it.
VOTE: Greeting Not thrilled with it, they're not exactly super wolfy. But I do believe they're most certainly a >rand wolf slot atm.

In post 618, Mapuche Never Die wrote:

In post 218, Eiralox wrote:No other thoughts on anyone else Juice?

I don’t like this post. Instead of asking Juice whether they have any reads, Eiralox asks Juice whether they have no thoughts on anyone else. This has something of a negative undertone which shades Juice.

??????????????

@Gandhi current stuff please

I swear I will be productive by Day3 or something
A quick look at page 8 frustrates me. Because I feel 178 makes Greeting and Eiralox rarely wolf/wolf here.